Jump to content
Volvospeed Forums

Politics On Politics.


flyfishing3

Recommended Posts

One of the newest corruption topic has recently surface for Portland politicians. How can they sleep at night knowing they cost tax payers millions in money....Oregon budget deficit has been billions for god know how long.

-----------------------------------------------

Some cliff note.

The new park ultimately cost $15.1 million – 2 ½ times more than budgeted

The developers knew that by turning over about 190,000 square feet for the riverfront park, they could get the rights to develop more than 900,000 square feet elsewhere.
They could use those development rights to exceed zoning. For example, the developers could construct a five-story building where current rules allowed for only four stories.

The 4-acre greenway is also one of Portland's most expensive parks to operate and maintain, at nearly $500,000 a year compared to $327,000 for its northern neighbor, 30-acre Tom McCall Waterfront Park

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2016/02/portlands_151_million_pathway.html

 

So Nick Fish sent out an email to his supporter 

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2016/02/nick_fish_concedes_greenway_di.html#incart_big-photo

his main excuse * greenway didn't get 'sunshine it deserved'*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kevin. said:

I just wish people would be civic about shit and just do their fucking jobs. 

In a strange way, they kind of are. They represent their voters. Who are presumably happy about them trying to prevent the new appointment. It's spineless and unethical, but it represents the interest of the people who voted for them.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fudge_Brownie said:

In a strange way, they kind of are. They represent their voters. Who are presumably happy about them trying to prevent the new appointment. It's spineless and unethical, but it represents the interest of the people who voted for them.

It's funny how people say that the Senate acting according to the Constitution is being spineless and unethical.  There's a reason there are checks and balances.  It's perfectly in the Senate's rights to reject an Obama nominee or to slow down the process. Like our dear President himself once said, "Elections have consequences and guess what I won."  Only in this case he can't appoint a justice by Executive Order so he's stuck having to deal with the Party in power which is the way it's supposed to work.

Senator Schumer made the exact same argument against Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Burn-E said:

It's funny how people say that the Senate acting according to the Constitution is being spineless and unethical.

For the same reason that I think you can exercise your right to say whatever you want - however spineless or unethical. They're given the right; but they don't have to use it. I think a factor is what appears to be increasing divergence between the parties. At this point, I wonder how many people would just like to see something get done, even if it isn't consistent with their interests.

A senator and/or various senators from a party could try and filibuster everything, right? Wouldn't you be annoyed if the did that? Regardless of party?

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2016 at 11:58 AM, Fudge_Brownie said:

They represent their voters. Who are presumably happy about them trying to prevent the new appointment. It's spineless and unethical, but it represents the interest of the people who voted for them.

This isn't quite true.  The represent the people who got them elected, not necessarily the people who voted for them.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...